As I study “intellectual” “property” “rights” with a view to writing something sometime, I am obliged to read the best works on the topic. I keep coming across references to a work by one William Patry, a copyright lawyer. Now note that designation, not “intellectual” “property” “rights” lawyer, or patent lawyer (although he is one), merely “copyright lawyer.”
In fact, he bills himself (and no doubt his clients) as the “most prolific scholar of copyright in history.” He also defines himself as a centrist on the topic of copyrights. In his book he is given to such citations as “the greatest speech ever given on copyrights”. Which, of course, the most prolific scholar would be in a position to assess the greatest speech, wouldn’t he? Well, talk about an opportunity to get in some serious lawyer-bashing. This guy is leaves himself wide open.
And since he is not anti-copyright, he is necessarily to me an implacable enemy.
Now, having said that, the book is probably the best thing written on copyrights, ever. He is probably the most prolific scholar of copyright in history. The thing is a stunning tour de force. It’s a mere 200 pages of content, and I am only through page 84, but I must pause and report.
Only at page 84 and he has destroyed all arguments for “intellectual” “property” “rights”. And I mean he catalogs each one that is used today, traces the history of the argument, and destroys them. All of them.
He examines the pro-IPR data regarding the losses incurred by industry. This is a particularly delightful section, demonstrating the entire oeuvre is bogus, and forensically it could not rise to the level of social interest. There is nothing to support the claims of losses by anyone in any industry. Now, I have said the same thing many times, from a practical level, but Patry hits it from a forensics angle. All taxpayer money directed at enforcement of “intellectual” “property” “rights” is now clearly a waste.
Nonetheless, the full federal power of policing of “intellectual” “property” “rights” is brought down upon 12 year old girls. Edgar Bronfman, when not leveraging the holocaust to shake down Swiss bankers, and Jack Valenti are the villains in this piece. But the gallery of pro-IPR rogues is vast. I suppose if Diane Von Furstenberg had made her greedy demands before the book was printed she too would have been included.
And Patry is no idiot savant who solely mastered copyrights, he ranges outside his field with breathtaking perspicacity. Like a Chomsky-grade linguist, Patry takes on metaphors used in the copyright wars to defend “intellectual” “property” “rights”. He asks us to pause and reflect on in what way is a 12 year old girl like a pirate?
Let me add some visuals:
 |
| Pirates - Plunder, Murder, Rape, Mayhem |
 |
| 12 year Old Girl Who Downloaded a Song |
Pirates vs. downloader. Does this matter? Well, very much. As you see, a 12 year old girl who downloaded a song feels the weight of the law, like a pirate, if we call her one. If Federal Prosecutor can call Aaron Swartz a pirate, the Federal Prosecutor can hound Swartz literally to death. And did. China is so taken by the pirate argument its new laws in fact make provision for the death penalty of copyright violators.
The Chinese have responded to the dilemma by activating and, on occasion, carrying out copyright protection laws passed 10 years ago. Last month a regulation made infringement of international copyrights a criminal offense in extreme cases. It means pirates could be executed, although no one is known to have been jailed so far.
So far Patry has destroyed any basis for “intellectual” “property” “rights” and destroyed any argument for damage done by violation thereof, and exposed the moral bankruptcy of anyone advocating “intellectual” “property” “rights." Not much left. Not bad for 84 pages. Not to mention if his book has any effect, he'll no doubt save lives.
Yet he has asserted a few times there is a warrant for copyrights, and I will read through to see what this warrant is. He is not anti-copyright, he is anti “intellectual” “property” “rights." Get the book and join me.
3 comments:
There are some interesting articles with Patry on Copyright law on Techdirt.com:
It's not copyright that creates value, it's consumers' willingness to buy:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090813/0126395864.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090823/1538545965.shtml
I've said as much many times... if someone were to "steal my book" and print it and sell it, or even put their name on my book, I could care less. They still have to produce copies and develop a market. if they do, and I have seen it done, then I will decide if I want to take the market they discovered away from them for myself. I've done this.
Apple sold a billion songs at 99 cents in a couple of years not because of the copyright, but because of the marketing and delivery. Amazon created kindle, which accounts for 10% of my book revenue right now, not because of copyrights, but because they wanted to be the "go to" means of buying and selling digital versions. Copyrights are utterly irrelevant to the entire project.
The world is tied down by people who want to believe there is a system that will complement their sense of entitlement, even if demonstrably that system does not and cannot work. They will not let go unless they are assured some other sinecure that gives them something for nothing. The role of the state is to back their personal preferences with violence. Intellectual Property Attorneys are the happy face on this regime.
http://www.legalproductivity.com/practice-management/the-worst-business-lawyer/
More reasons not to involve lawyers in business.
Post a Comment